Metropolitan Line extension as replacement of Circle Line idea

[JamesRowden]

As I have said before and say again, all this sort of crayoning does is create difficulties elsewhere.

How much real thought did you give to this ?

Congratulations - you've now introduced :

• NO service between High Street Ken and Gloucester Road (because you scrapped Circle)

• every 5 min reversing District west to east at Aldgate, wasting through platforms cutting overall throughput, anyway is impossible on the current track layout, and even if you could, improbable timetable on using two platforms for these 12 TPH alternating reversals with any kind of robustness

• every 5 min reversing District Wimbledons west to east at Earls Court, again cutting overall throughput by wasting through platforms, again impossible on the current track layout (indeed see your own diagram), again needs 2 platforms alternating for 12 TPH reversal robustness, at the very last location you want 12 stationary trains reversing per hour. You've more or less killed 1/3 total Earls Court capacity in one hit

• Additional interchanges - of which up to 50% are not cross platform in the same direction because of the terminating services alternating platforms that the layout places on oppsite islands

Lunacy.

Put the crayons away.

I did consider these. I even described them in my post.

I don't think having to change at Earls Court or Aldgate between every 5 minutes services is significantly worse than having an every 10 minute direct service.

There would be no through services at Aldgate. The present every 10 minute through services at Aldgate don't seem to be making much use of the through platforms.

Every 5 minutes rather than every 10 minutes services from Edgware Road to Earls Court, and District core to Wimbledon, I think is better than every 10 minutes direct services on the Circle and Edgware Road to Wimbledon, (unless it becomes overcrowded) even if connections at Earls Court aren't cross platform.

You haven't really come up with any real issues with my idea (unlike myself which I stated in the post).

 

[Helvellyn]

There's a case for also identifying that as a separate line, perhaps with a lighter green on the map. I'll leave others to suggest a name.

If the Chelsea-Hackney line had been built that had a proposed light green colour and would have taken over the Wimbledon branch of the District. I can't remember if that meant all District Line trains would have disappeared, or if Wimbledon-Edgware would still have run (in which case keeping the District name would have been odd!).

 

[D7666]

You haven't really come up with any real issues with my idea (unlike myself which I stated in the post).

You have not said how are you going to reverse 12 TPH at Aldgate and 12 TPH at Earls Court, when neither location has the track layout to do it, neither has the platform capacity to do it robustly in less than 2 platforms, the reversals introduce e/b / w/b conflicting moves both east of Earls Court and west of Aldgate, that up to 50% of the suggested reversals introduce non cross platform same direction passenger interchanging, and that there is no HS Ken / Gloster Rd service.

Take a look at the map you posted.

How do you reverse your proposed 12 TPH Edgware Road / Earls Court service at Earls Court ?

Do the same for Aldgate.

Where is your HS Ken / GlosterRd service ?

 

[35B]

Agree that the H&C should probably just become part of the Metropolitan line. As @Helvellyn says, the District has Edgware Road to Wimbledon which is very similar.

The H&C was split out from the Met to make the service clear and distinct.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Aug 2025 ==

While the break of the Circle at Edgware Road gets lamented I note nobody ever proposes that the Wimbledon-Edgware service get extended along the Northern part of the route. Circle as Hammersmith-Edgware via Tower Hill and a 'new' Wimbledon-Barking via Edgware would have given some interesting through journeys at the expense of the doubled capacity Hammersmith-Edgware that the Circle reorganisation brought.

I’d welcome that - but also be interested to know what analysis was done of the impact of breaking through journeys/easy changes by creating the teacup.

 

[JamesRowden]

You have not said how are you going to reverse 12 TPH at Aldgate and 12 TPH at Earls Court, when neither location has the track layout to do it, neither has the platform capacity to do it robustly in less than 2 platforms, the reversals introduce e/b / w/b conflicting moves both east of Earls Court and west of Aldgate, that up to 50% of the suggested reversals introduce non cross platform same direction passenger interchanging, and that there is no HS Ken / Gloster Rd service.

Take a look at the map you posted.

How do you reverse your proposed 12 TPH Edgware Road / Earls Court service at Earls Court ?

Do the same for Aldgate.

Where is your HS Ken / GlosterRd service ?

Look at my first post. I said 'if the tracks from platforms 1&4 towards High Street Kensington are bidirectional or could easily be made bidirectional'. Earls Court Platforms 2 and 3 would be used for the through services.

Aldgate also seems to have 4 platforms. So also has the platform capacity to terminate every 5 minute services from both directions, if the track/signaling is configured for it, or could easily be configured for it.

I am suggesting that there might be no need for a direct High Street Kensington to Gloucester Road service if each route through Zone 1 was at least 1 train every 5 minutes.

I'm not saying do this tomorrow. I'm not saying it's fundamentally better than the present service pattern. It's just fun speculation for how a better service than today could hypothetically be implemented.

 

[Mgameing123]

There's a case for also identifying that as a separate line, perhaps with a lighter green on the map. I'll leave others to suggest a name.

Wimbleware is the unofficial name for the service.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Aug 2025 ==

If it's just about simplifying line names revert the Hammersmith & City back to Metropolitan. No different to the District having Wimbledon-Edgeware Road.

While the break of the Circle at Edgware Road gets lamented I note nobody ever proposes that the Wimbledon-Edgware service get extended along the Northern part of the route. Circle as Hammersmith-Edgware via Tower Hill and a 'new' Wimbledon-Barking via Edgware would have given some interesting through journeys at the expense of the doubled capacity Hammersmith-Edgware that the Circle reorganisation brought.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Aug 2025 ==

If we're talking pure speculation it's a shame that given some of the common interests between the Met and Great Central that when Marylebone was built they didn't shift the Baker Street link over there so that terminating services would use one station and the link to the "Circle" would have been adjacent to a new station on Edgeware Road (Great Central Met?).

Could have led to a different look for the Jubilee as well if the switch of Stanmore branch Met services to the Bakerloo in the 1930s was slightly further West at Marylebone, then when the Jubilee was built it would have gone Marylebone - Bond Street quite direct (it doesn't take the most direct route to Baker Street when looked at geographically!).

You'd have had Marylebone then with great tube access and some terminating Met servives alongside Chiltern. Maybe even a willingness to terminate Amersham/Chesham trains alongside the Watfords so only Uxbridges ran through to Aldgate (and suddenly room for Wimbledon-Edgware services to becomes Wimbledon-Edgware-Aldgate).

That’s not the point of the changes. The point is to simplify the service pattern and to provide new connections . Not to reduce the amount of lines.

The Wimbleware service may aswell become a line for itself as it is quite a confusing service to have as on the tube map it is shown that you can in theory catch a train from Richmond or Ealing Broadway to Edgware Road which we all know is not the case.


In terms of the Tower Hill to Wimbledon service. You could may aswell make it a branch on the Metropolitan Line but I don’t know if Aldgate Junction would be able to handle that much.

 

[Harpo]

My best take on the Circle line is to cherish it as a slow, inefficient relic that those unfamiliar with London can use in a simple, infrequent and unhurried way, leaving extra capacity on the faster and far more frequent tube services for those who know how to get around London efficiently.

 

[Mr. SW]

There's a case for also identifying that as a separate line, perhaps with a lighter green on the map. I'll leave others to suggest a name.

Kensington Line, because it goes through - er - Kensington (the area).

 

[YorksLad12]

My best take on the Circle line is to cherish it as a slow, inefficient relic that those unfamiliar with London can use in a simple, infrequent and unhurried way, leaving extra capacity on the faster and far more frequent tube services for those who know how to get around London efficiently.

I use/used the Circle Line when travelling back to Kings Cross from Westminster. On the way to Westminster I'd take the Victoria/Piccadilly and change at Green Park to the Jubilee. The Circle does have the advantage of being a sub-surface line, so no interminable wandering around station complexes! The only real issue I have with it is that it doesn't connect with Waterloo - apart from that I'm in the "leave alone" category.

 

[CMS1]

Fairly obvious comment but the best use of an underground line is in joining 2 opposite suburban services (like most the tube lines and crossrail did) as as well as providing the underground line for travel within the city, you are
a) taking the commuters further into the city,
b) facilitating cross city travel

Thus the Met terminating at Aldgate is arguably not maximising the lines potential.

Speculative proposal: connect it to a London Bridge service e.g. Hayes or Greenwich, using a new section from Aldgate going under Tower Hill and London Bridge, then a portal after London Bridge (the difficult bit). Would be a lot less tunnelling than a Bakerloo extension and as per the other thread, most commuters want to go to the city, not the west end like the Bakerloo. It also would connect Liverpool street and London Bridge stations

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Aug 2025 ==

I.e.

 

[Falcon1200]

Probably better in the Speculative Forum about infrastructure that will never, ever get built, but construct two additional lines from Praed Street Jc to Baker Street allowing trains to terminate there rather than Edgware Road (and then continue quadruplification further east.....)

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Probably better in the Speculative Forum about infrastructure that will never, ever get built, but construct two additional lines from Praed Street Jc to Baker Street allowing trains to terminate there rather than Edgware Road (and then continue quadruplification further east.....)

Additional speculative lines and very substantial rebuilding of the complex and heavily trafficked station at Baker Street ? (and Paddington Circle line) impact

A mere 30 trains at hour over the flat junctions onto the Met line , not to impact on the Circle line .

I really struggle to wonder "why"

 

[A S Leib]

and then continue quadruplification further east.....)

Preferably there'd be cross-platform interchanges between the old and new tracks in the same direction so passengers can get whichever one comes first, although if frequency on both is high enough, it might not matter much.

Apart from King's Cross St. Pancras (one island platform) (and taking over the space of the disused platforms at Moorgate?), do any stations between Baker Street and Liverpool Street have enough room to do that?

 

[Mgameing123]

Preferably there'd be cross-platform interchanges between the old and new tracks in the same direction so passengers can get whichever one comes first, although if frequency on both is high enough, it might not matter much.

Apart from King's Cross St. Pancras (one island platform) (and taking over the space of the disused platforms at Moorgate?), do any stations between Baker Street and Liverpool Street have enough room to do that?

We also got to remember that the Baker Street platforms are probably grade listed due to the roof. But the idea of terminating at Baker Street is a good idea.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Aug 2025 ==

You have not said how are you going to reverse 12 TPH at Aldgate and 12 TPH at Earls Court, when neither location has the track layout to do it, neither has the platform capacity to do it robustly in less than 2 platforms, the reversals introduce e/b / w/b conflicting moves both east of Earls Court and west of Aldgate, that up to 50% of the suggested reversals introduce non cross platform same direction passenger interchanging, and that there is no HS Ken / Gloster Rd service.

Take a look at the map you posted.

How do you reverse your proposed 12 TPH Edgware Road / Earls Court service at Earls Court ?

Do the same for Aldgate.

Where is your HS Ken / GlosterRd service ?

You can possibly make some trains continue to Kensington Olympia to turn around?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Aug 2025 ==

Fairly obvious comment but the best use of an underground line is in joining 2 opposite suburban services (like most the tube lines and crossrail did) as as well as providing the underground line for travel within the city, you are
a) taking the commuters further into the city,
b) facilitating cross city travel

Thus the Met terminating at Aldgate is arguably not maximising the lines potential.

Speculative proposal: connect it to a London Bridge service e.g. Hayes or Greenwich, using a new section from Aldgate going under Tower Hill and London Bridge, then a portal after London Bridge (the difficult bit). Would be a lot less tunnelling than a Bakerloo extension and as per the other thread, most commuters want to go to the city, not the west end like the Bakerloo. It also would connect Liverpool street and London Bridge stations

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Aug 2025 ==

I.e.
View attachment 185511

I think your idea sounds quite good but Aldgate Met will need to go. That’s the only place I can think off with room for that tunnel portal. Also maybe also look into what directions a Met Line extension could go and how we could maximize train capacity.

 

[Falcon1200]

A mere 30 trains at hour over the flat junctions onto the Met line , not to impact on the Circle line .

'allowing trains to terminate there' - Baker Street, for better interchange with other services. No additional trains over the junction at Baker Street.

As a I think I mentioned, 'Speculative; and 'will never. ever get built'.

 

[Mgameing123]

'allowing trains to terminate there' - Baker Street, for better interchange with other services. No additional trains over the junction at Baker Street.

As a I think I mentioned, 'Speculative; and 'will never. ever get built'.

If you did really want to look into it though and it actually got built. Would it justify a case to do the same from Baker Street to East of Farringdon?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

With the present constraints in the Moorgate area to terminate services east to west on the surface lines , add a very expensive and extensive rebuilding and resignalling there , not to forget significant alleviation of passenger flows there.

I am still trying to get a grip on reversing a significant number of trains at Baker St (east to west) on the "Circle" line. Maybe I have lost some of the reasoning here............

The whole sheer complexity of the "northern Circle" - say Praed St Jct to Liverpool St , in terms of train movemet is well made , BUT one needs to consider that whole infrastructure contraints - apart from the great age of the formation , such issues as the Ray Street gridiron and the course of the one time River Fleet , not to mention essential non railway infrastructure such as water pipelines and very many other issues.

 

[Dstock7080]

Wimbleware is the unofficial name for the service.

Only in enthusiasts eyes, not used at all by LT/LU.

 

[BerkshireRails]

I would rebuild Edgware Road to Pread Street Junction to be four-tracked and paired by use to increase capacity. It would be rather expensive, however, it would improve reliability by splitting the District Line from the Hammersmith & City Line in the Edgware Road area.

I would also rebuild Earls Court to allow Wimbledon to Edgware Road services to no longer conflict with Ealing Broadway and Richmond to Upminster services. This would give the district line additional reliability, as well as the removal of the Kensington (Olympia) shuttle, which would remove the flat crossing.

At Aldgate, I would see if it is possible to grade-separate the Westbound Hammersmith & City Line between Aldgate East and Liverpool Street.

I will consider doing a similar grade separation for the Westbound Metropolitan Line at Baker Street to increase line speed and capacity.

Another option could be a new deep-level tunnel bored between Baker Street and London Fenchurch Street with stops at Euston, King's Cross St Pancras, Farringdon, Moorgate & Liverpool Street as an extension of the Express Metropolitan Line operations.

 

[A S Leib]

Another option could be a new deep-level tunnel bored between Baker Street and London Fenchurch Street

Assuming you're planning on continuing onto c2c lines, shouldn't that be Baker Street to at least Limehouse given that Fenchurch Street's platforms are at viaduct rather than ground level?

 

[Harpo]

The SSL’s only salvation would be a time machine. Go back to the 1850s/60s, grab the Victorian engineers and fast forward to the 1870s to view the Greathead Shield. Then, convince them that cut & cover is a really bad idea that will seriously annoy train spotters in 150 years time.

PS. Take an internet connection and some crayons on the journey to demonstrate 21st century planning techniques.

 

[Class15]

The SSL’s only salvation would be a time machine. Go back to the 1850s/60s, grab the Victorian engineers and fast forward to the 1870s to view the Greathead Shield. Then, convince them that cut & cover is a really bad idea that will seriously annoy train spotters in 150 years time.

PS. Take an internet connection and some crayons on the journey to demonstrate 21st century planning techniques.

Sounds like what NIMBY Rails (on steam) is made for!

 

[BerkshireRails]

Assuming you're planning on continuing onto c2c lines, shouldn't that be Baker Street to at least Limehouse given that Fenchurch Street's platforms are at viaduct rather than ground level?

Terminating at Fenchurch Street provides direct tube access to c2c London's Terminal. I would consider an extension South of the river along one of Southeastern's loops, most likely the Eltham loop. I see limited reasons to run along the c2c lines because you would rejoin the SSR at West Ham. You must also consider that c2c is 25kV OLE and Metropolitan is 750V Fourth Rail. Plus you need some place too divert the c2c services if you are taking over the c2c lines.

If your diverting c2c services you might as well link them up with a new tunnel to Chiltern to create c2c2c (Coast2Capital 2Chiltern) service.

 

[Mgameing123]

I would rebuild Edgware Road to Pread Street Junction to be four-tracked and paired by use to increase capacity. It would be rather expensive, however, it would improve reliability by splitting the District Line from the Hammersmith & City Line in the Edgware Road area.

I would also rebuild Earls Court to allow Wimbledon to Edgware Road services to no longer conflict with Ealing Broadway and Richmond to Upminster services. This would give the district line additional reliability, as well as the removal of the Kensington (Olympia) shuttle, which would remove the flat crossing.

At Aldgate, I would see if it is possible to grade-separate the Westbound Hammersmith & City Line between Aldgate East and Liverpool Street.

I will consider doing a similar grade separation for the Westbound Metropolitan Line at Baker Street to increase line speed and capacity.

Another option could be a new deep-level tunnel bored between Baker Street and London Fenchurch Street with stops at Euston, King's Cross St Pancras, Farringdon, Moorgate & Liverpool Street as an extension of the Express Metropolitan Line operations.

I’m not so keen on the Kensington Olympia shuttle removal. It only runs on weekends anyways so I don’t think you’re going to add any additional capacity on the District Line.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Aug 2025 ==

I would rebuild Edgware Road to Pread Street Junction to be four-tracked and paired by use to increase capacity. It would be rather expensive, however, it would improve reliability by splitting the District Line from the Hammersmith & City Line in the Edgware Road area.

I would also rebuild Earls Court to allow Wimbledon to Edgware Road services to no longer conflict with Ealing Broadway and Richmond to Upminster services. This would give the district line additional reliability, as well as the removal of the Kensington (Olympia) shuttle, which would remove the flat crossing.

At Aldgate, I would see if it is possible to grade-separate the Westbound Hammersmith & City Line between Aldgate East and Liverpool Street.

I will consider doing a similar grade separation for the Westbound Metropolitan Line at Baker Street to increase line speed and capacity.

Another option could be a new deep-level tunnel bored between Baker Street and London Fenchurch Street with stops at Euston, King's Cross St Pancras, Farringdon, Moorgate & Liverpool Street as an extension of the Express Metropolitan Line operations.

I like that idea. I would though add a stop at Barbican so that way we can use the existing right of way between Farringdon and Moorgate.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Aug 2025 ==

Terminating at Fenchurch Street provides direct tube access to c2c London's Terminal. I would consider an extension South of the river along one of Southeastern's loops, most likely the Eltham loop. I see limited reasons to run along the c2c lines because you would rejoin the SSR at West Ham. You must also consider that c2c is 25kV OLE and Metropolitan is 750V Fourth Rail. Plus you need some place too divert the c2c services if you are taking over the c2c lines.

If your diverting c2c services you might as well link them up with a new tunnel to Chiltern to create c2c2c (Coast2Capital 2Chiltern) service.

I don’t think terminating at Fenchurch Street is a good idea. We should continue beyond down to South London since South London is quite deprived of tube services. Also Chiltern will be linked up anyways if the Met is linked up.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

I seem to recall the patronage of the Wimbledon - Edgware Rd service certainly lightened up once past Paddington (coming north) - giving shed loads of space on the arriving / terminal services. EGR therefore a suitable terminal point.

No one seems to have mentioned the H&C coming up from Hammersmith - in my opinion very much appreciated by the now posher Ladbroke Grove etc area , and nothing now like the "challenging" area it was in the middle of the 20thC , presumably many gainfully employed and other travel needs further east. Needs to be considered in "crayon scribblings" - though am sure TfL planners are very aware of these factors.

 

[35B]

I would rebuild Edgware Road to Pread Street Junction to be four-tracked and paired by use to increase capacity. It would be rather expensive, however, it would improve reliability by splitting the District Line from the Hammersmith & City Line in the Edgware Road area.

At Aldgate, I would see if it is possible to grade-separate the Westbound Hammersmith & City Line between Aldgate East and Liverpool Street.

I will consider doing a similar grade separation for the Westbound Metropolitan Line at Baker Street to increase line speed and capacity.

Have you actually been to the places you're talking about. Not as in "been on a train through the station" or even "changed train at the station", but alighted and walked around at street level to actually understand the geography you're talking about?

These stations are typically only 5-10 minutes walk from each other, set amidst high rise buildings with deep foundations. The idea of taking tunnels down, round, and up in such a short distance is simply not practically plausible.

I would also rebuild Earls Court to allow Wimbledon to Edgware Road services to no longer conflict with Ealing Broadway and Richmond to Upminster services. This would give the district line additional reliability, as well as the removal of the Kensington (Olympia) shuttle, which would remove the flat crossing.

How do you propose to do this while also retaining the existing Wimbledon - Upminster flows (which in my experience are the busiest trains through Earl's Court)? Again, you may want to consider what's above ground.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

As an exlong time resident of Wimbledon , and very frequent user of the District Line - just throw in an observation of the Wimbledon - Tower Hill service - (much like my comments above on the H&C) , one to be not overlooked and an exceedingly well used and useful service - importantly it makes a piece of the jigsaw of the surface lines , particularly looking further east towards Whitechapel and beyond.

 

[swt_passenger]

You can possibly make some trains continue to Kensington Olympia to turn around?

Why do you think a few years ago they removed most of the underground service to Olympia? To remove the crossing conflicts at the flat junction west of Earls Court.

 

[BerkshireRails]

I like that idea. I would though add a stop at Barbican so that way we can use the existing right of way between Farringdon and Moorgate.

The reason for not calling at Barbican is to enable a better alignment from Farringdon to Moorgate as well as the Metropolitan Line deep sections would only call at the interchange stations, with an increased service on the Hammersmith & City Line and Circle Lines to make up for the lose of the Metropolitan line calling all stations between Baker street and Aldgate.

Have you actually been to the places you're talking about. Not as in "been on a train through the station" or even "changed train at the station", but alighted and walked around at street level to actually understand the geography you're talking about?

These stations are typically only 5-10 minutes walk from each other, set amidst high rise buildings with deep foundations. The idea of taking tunnels down, round, and up in such a short distance is simply not practically plausible.

How do you propose to do this while also retaining the existing Wimbledon - Upminster flows (which in my experience are the busiest trains through Earl's Court)? Again, you may want to consider what's above ground.

You will have crossovers to allow access from Upminster to Wimbledon, however the main idea of grade separation is that you improvement reliability by removing conflicting moves between Ealing Broadway/Richmond services to Upminster and Wimbledon to Edgware Road services, I know there would still be conflict because of Wimbledon to Upminster services however this would be a lot less than now. The perfect time would be now, as there are no buildings on the tunnel at the moment.

Nothing is stopping you from four-tracking by putting the other lines below the existing lines to provide enough space for four-tracking. That is the point for the stations on the Metropolitan Line extension to only be interchange ones with non-SSR lines. At Edgware Road, you would be able to unify the Bakerloo and SSR stations. I regularly walk around the streets of central London.

Why do you think a few years ago they removed most of the underground service to Olympia? To remove the crossing conflicts at the flat junction west of Earls Court.

That is why I want to remove Kensington (Olympia) Branch once Lilley Bridge depot closes and is replaced by the Sidings on the Thameslink line at Moorgate and at Turnham Green. I feel a Replacement bus service could be more attractive than the every 20 minutes shuttle, as the bus could run every 5-10 minutes as it wouldn't be limited by the single line. The former Kensington (Oylmpia) Branch could be used to increase capacity on West London Line to make up for the lose of the shuttle.

 

[YorksLad12]

At Aldgate, I would see if it is possible to grade-separate the Westbound Hammersmith & City Line between Aldgate East and Liverpool Street.

Would there be any scope/usefulness in moving the Met terminus from Aldgate to Tower Hill (apart from the need to build a bay platform)? Closer to Fenchurch Street than Aldgate, walking connection to DLR, same station interchange to the District Line.